open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Accord reached at CCP's special summit
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 : last (38)

Author Topic

Karrick Salk
Posted - 2011.07.03 16:51:00 - [991]
 

CCP - Nice to see the knee-jerk reaction is still working there.

I will resub accounts when I log in, see better vid performance (I do not have a slouchy rig by no means) <the current vid performace is horrible> and when I can station spin again without the performace hit.
- my current end date is in Nov. Hope to be here after.

I chose to play EVE because it did not have the girly walking avatars crazieness. I really care for that about as much as I care for getting a tooth pulled. With rusty pliers, in a back ally on the "bad" side of town.

As a note: Add P2W items above that of the normal sub, and I'm gone. Period.

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:11:00 - [992]
 

Originally by: CCP Navigator

Minimum Specs

The minimum specifications that we display are for one client running on the lowest end machine. This means that you will be able to load Incarna at the minimum spec and play EVE Online. We are going to investigate introducing a minimum specification for players who want to run two clients in the upcoming 'ship spinning' view. What these minimum specs will be are still to be decided and, again, we will bring this to you in the form of a dev blog.


As I said in my introduction, I just want to give you all some quick feedback and that a lot of this is based on technical limitations. I don't want to further expand on these answers as it would be much better if you heard them directly from someone who has more knowledge about it than I do.


When you ask the others to read through the thread, could you ask them to address a concern that many of us have regarding the "minimum specs" issue?

I have read in other posts that said your devs are going to be working toward getting incarna to work similar to how "pre-incarna" worked in relation to system resource usage and performance, but at the same time, I see your post mentioning getting us a set of minimum specs for people who are wanting to run more than one client and deciding what those specs will be.(when they've been decided)

To preface my particular question:
I currently run a system that's about 3 months old, bought, configured, and assembled based on various things, namely the ability to run all 5 of my accounts on a single machine(2 in one screen and the other 3 in a screen of their own) after the release of incarna plus do the other things that I normally do on my home/work system when not playing.
I'm running an I7 quad core W/HT, 24 gigs of ram, dual GTX 460 cards (recommended by CCP in the EVGA coupon code email) and about 4 TB of total hard disk space with an SSD as the Win7 OS drive, yet when I run 3 clients on my system with the station environment loaded this system slows to a literal crawl and it's by no means even close to a "low end" system.

So the question is, are you guys planning on simply giving us a set of specs that we will have to have in order to play multiple accounts at the same time with some reasonable functionality?, or are the devs actually going to work on a reduction of the system resources needed by the incarna engine so that people aren't forced to go buy some super computer in order to just play the game that they love?

I only ask because it seems as though we're being told 2 different things relating to the performance issues of incarna.
also, if there's any information that "I" can contribute to their research or testing, (dxdiag, program dumps, ect) I'm happy to oblige.

Thank you for your time Sir.
o/
K.S.


Zeg Quul
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:15:00 - [993]
 

Edited by: Zeg Quul on 03/07/2011 17:25:24


ATM: cease fire at the best. Hilmar's megalomaniac e-mail still not answered. Weasel words from Zulu. Thats not a foundation of trust. Anyway, thx to CSM.


just remember : "We went out with a decisive strategy on pricing and we will stay the course and not flip flop around or knee jerk react to the predictable"






T1nyTradingMan
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:20:00 - [994]
 

After reading a lot of these comments the one thing I know won't change is that in any give large group of people there is going to be a subset that will never be happy, never trust and generally bring down a decent argument with **** poor logic.

Everyone should remember (and I know they won't) that CCP were the people that brought you the game you love, they were capable of doing that then.. Why is it so difficult to place in them some trust that they will continue to work in the interests of the community??

Anyway the targets of this post will not read it or simply dismiss it so I'll just go back to playing the game..

Thanks CCP and the CSM for clearing some things up.. I wasn't ever unsubbing but you have put a few minor concerns to rest, thankyou.

Kal Erkkinen
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:39:00 - [995]
 

Has CCP Zulu been slapped yet? Very Happy

Glad to hear everything is done and sorted.

Phugoid
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:41:00 - [996]
 

Well, im a fairly new player... but i'd like to thank the CSMs for their hard work on this, and for CCP for realizing something "fishy" happened. Eve is still a great game, and of course highly addictive :)

WCPistolPete
Gallente
MacroIntel
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:53:00 - [997]
 

Not drinking the Kool-Aid here.

I'm still very cynical.

Hahaha. A statement made by those saying our representatives, in compliance with the NDA, didn't find anything objectionable. What if they did? Does the NDA allow them to disclose that? Well, if CCP enforces the NDA, they wouldn't be able to tell us they weren't happy with what they heard as it might reveal a "trade secret" or other intellectual property. Fail IMHO.

Subs remain cancelled until bugs and broken mechanics introduced over the past few years are resolved. Performance must also be brought back to pre-CQ levels without the need for systems upgrades or special software that forces a shutdown before CQ runaway-overheating of CPUs and GPUs occur.

Question never asked: What will CCP do for those who lost equipment because of poor coding?

Hilmar's leaked email: Still a loser. The CSM noting it but CCP's failure to address it is truly a slap in the face. Hilmar: Please go self destruct a fully-loaded cargo ship and your pod in Jita as penance. Be sure to drop some +5s and tons of faction gear. I would consider that a single step toward restoring trust.

MT and "game-breaking" features: MT remains. I can only wait and watch to see what else develops as CCP evolves the NeX market.

Sorry, the trust was broken and I'm not one to jump back on the fence after being pushed off. Mad

Makar Kravchenko
Posted - 2011.07.03 17:58:00 - [998]
 

Spin that PR machine!

IGNATIUS HOOD
Amarr
Zephyr Corp
V.A.S.T.
Posted - 2011.07.03 18:00:00 - [999]
 

Originally by: Karrick Salk
CCP - Nice to see the knee-jerk reaction is still working there.

I will resub accounts when I log in, see better vid performance (I do not have a slouchy rig by no means) <the current vid performace is horrible> and when I can station spin again without the performace hit.
- my current end date is in Nov. Hope to be here after.

I chose to play EVE because it did not have the girly walking avatars crazieness. I really care for that about as much as I care for getting a tooth pulled. With rusty pliers, in a back ally on the "bad" side of town.

As a note: Add P2W items above that of the normal sub, and I'm gone. Period.


So in other words.. You're a sadist? I personally like WiS about as much as having someone cut my achilles tendons with a rusty hacksaw blade, but hey.. to each his own.

Slate Shoa
Posted - 2011.07.03 18:07:00 - [1000]
 

Edited by: Slate Shoa on 03/07/2011 18:09:03
Originally by: Kvetha Fricai
ephasis added to quoted posts
Quote:
Posted - 2010.06.24 17:23:00 - [20]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Originally by: Clolo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This has me all confused, is CCP going to start offering some sort of Microtransaction for SP?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No. There are no microtransaction plans, whatsoever. I wrote "in this case" because this extended downtime was an unusual situation. It's not every day we relocate our servers to a new facility.


Quote:
Posted - 2010.06.24 17:13:00 - [7]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by: CCP Shadow on 24/06/2010 17:30:40
Just for clarification, the skillpoints CCP will be giving pilots to make up for the extended downtime in this case is not tied to microtransactions.

Editing to add this: We do not have plans to go microtransaction with EVE.




So, in one short year, we went from "no plans" for MT to "deploying" MT? Is this what you call truth now or then? Get it straight CCP, tell the truth or lose the subs. I want to have it right now, in writing, that you will NEVER introduce items in the NEX that will IN ANY WAY effect game play period. No exotic ammo, ships etc. Put it out there as we are waiting to see and hear it.

QTF

If CCP has set any trend, it's that they make the plans shortly after they announce that there are no plans... CCP has lost my trust, not just because of this but because of a multitude of false promises and inadequacies.

Oh, and I've been promised DevBlogs before and those never appeared. I'm not paying to wait and see if CCP will hold to their (vague) word this time. My subscription remains canceled until CCP explicitly states that they will never introduce gameplay changing items in the NEX.

They never will...

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.03 18:36:00 - [1001]
 

I'm happy with the results of this summit. I think the meeting was productive and its face-to-face nature was key. Kudos to CCP for being smart about the damage control of this whole fiasco. And big ups to the CSM members who dropped everything at a moments notice to fly to Iceland.

I however am still of the belief that some mild, non-permanent game enhancing items should be sold in the NeX. I don't see why it's fair that those with more time than money should have the absolute advantage in this game. I think it needs to be balanced so that there is some advantage to having more time than money, and some advantage to be had for having more money than time. It's a fine line but it's one that can be walked successfully.

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.03 18:39:00 - [1002]
 

Edited by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath on 03/07/2011 18:40:20
Originally by: WCPistolPete
Not drinking the Kool-Aid here.

Hahaha. A statement made by those saying our representatives, in compliance with the NDA, didn't find anything objectionable. What if they did? Does the NDA allow them to disclose that? Well, if CCP enforces the NDA, they wouldn't be able to tell us they weren't happy with what they heard as it might reveal a "trade secret" or other intellectual property. Fail IMHO.



Actually, an NDA would not restrict them* from saying they weren't happy with what they saw, it would only restrict them from stating the specifics about what it was that they saw that they were displeased with, nothing more, nothing less.

For example, they are freely able to make a statement like "After reviewing the data presented to us, we feel that CCP is heading in a direction that we do not feel follows the immersion aspects of the game and we have made them aware of our stance on this issue." without violating the NDA in any way, shape or form, but on the other hand, they could not make the statement "After seeing CCP's plans to release an entirely new solar system 2 years from now, we (insert item here)." and make it without CCP's approval, otherwise they would be in violation of the NDA.

of course those are very broad examples, but I'm sure you'll understand them.

I agree with you on the bugs and performance issues and even though I'm not going to unsub because of them?, CCP needs to take a serious look into that issue and get a serious resolution to it in the works fast or there will likely be repercussions in the future.(IE. more unsubs, ect ect)

o/
K.S.
Edit: grammar. :P

Verras Togosa
Posted - 2011.07.03 18:40:00 - [1003]
 

Originally by: Vandrion

What they say doesn't matter.. Its what they do........


This

Originally by: Geksz
Edited by: Geksz on 02/07/2011 17:06:10
Edited by: Geksz on 02/07/2011 17:01:09
Will there be an explanation on WHY CAN'T WE HAVE A PERMANENT HANGAR BAY VEIW (like the old one without Incarna)? And why isn't Incarna optional like CCP promised earlier? (I'm sorry, but the option to have a still picture instead if the hangar is really disappointing, and in early test builds it wasn't even there!!!)

The blog clearly states that CCP is working on implementing a new spinning ship hangar view. OK, good to know, but what was wrong with the old one?


And this.

Kynder Furlow
Posted - 2011.07.03 19:06:00 - [1004]
 

I told you all NeX was vanity only -- just had to read the already released official blogs and put them together =P

Helothane
Posted - 2011.07.03 19:28:00 - [1005]
 

Edited by: Helothane on 03/07/2011 19:28:59
Initially I was annoyed at a lack of response to Hilmar's email, but then realized why it was not addressed in the CCP statement. The only person that can respond to the fallout from that email is Hilmar himself. No employee should presume to speak or apologize for something the CEO has said, except perhaps the PR department, and I'm not sure CCP has a dedicated one of those. Certainly a group-produced statement by developers is in no position to do so. Hilmar himself may not have responded because the majority who are upset over the email won't be swayed by words, but by actions.

Ef Ahak
Posted - 2011.07.03 19:34:00 - [1006]
 

Edited by: Ef Ahak on 03/07/2011 19:34:36
Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Originally by: CCP Navigator

Minimum Specs...
...
I'm running an I7 quad core W/HT, 24 gigs of ram, dual GTX 460 cards (recommended by CCP in the EVGA coupon code email) and about 4 TB of total hard disk space with an SSD as the Win7 OS drive, yet when I run 3 clients on my system with the station environment loaded this system slows to a literal crawl and it's by no means even close to a "low end" system.
...


Even though your HDD space means zero, it is obvious that you should be able to run this game absolutely flawless on that monster.

I just want to add a fact so that it doesn't get 'forgotten' in the performance discussion: there was a patch a few days before the release of incarna/CQ, where CCP turned part of the 2D UI elements into 3D dito. A change in shader coding, simply put.

Reason I say this is, as I said, so that it is clear that CQ is not the lone gunman in the case of the performance drop. It started with the re-coding of the normal UI a few days before CQ release.

Dan Estrellas Amigo
Posted - 2011.07.03 19:38:00 - [1007]
 

Originally by: Inspiration
Originally by: Dan Estrellas Amigo
Why is the CCP statement vague? Why is the CSM statement so clear?
I assume the CSM statement is based on other communications from CCP, because CCP's statement isn't clear enough to support CSM's.



Asking the question is answering it!



But all that does then is present the question - Why did CCP choose not to make a clear statement?

If we agree that it is clear that CSM's statement is not supported by CCP's statement, and we thus assume that CCP have communicated something to CSM for CSM to write with such certainty, why did CCP not announce that particular something in their statement? Why are CSM the only ones saying anything direct?

Why is it that CCP can now simply say "CSM said that, not us."

CSM, did you get tricked with wording?
No? Then how come CCP's statement is nowhere near as direct as CSM's?



By HyperZeg:
Quote:

1. Why MT in the first place ? Greed?
2. Why THAT many open backdoors in the statement? Buying a Titan per NEX is non-game-breaking but a non-vanity item. Also, gold ammo in a NEXX shop is still possible.
3. The internal newsletter contained plans for faction-standing sales per NEX. How can you say there were NEVER plans for it ?

1. Not greed, profit. Business is business, don't try to make a moral stand.
2. Incorrect. No non-vanity items will be sold in the NeX store. CCP said this clearly.
3. If what you say is true, good point. But I don't know what letter you are talking about. Perhaps you are referring to considerations only, not plans.



I repeat to highlight the question:
CSM, why is your statement different to CCP's in clarity?

Telion Rethson
Posted - 2011.07.03 19:42:00 - [1008]
 

Originally by: Jennifer Starling
They're removing PLEX from the game!! And the character bazaar as well!!

The investment of money in EVE should not give you an unfair advantage over the investment of time. The CSM, under NDA, has been presented with CCPs plans for continued evolution of the business model and agrees that nothing they saw breaks this principle.

Laughing


The problem with that comparison is that, firstly, the character bazaar does not directly allow buying characters for real-life cash. It is the seller that has to pay real-life cash to sell, or use PLEX to do so. You can buy characters by buying PLEX, selling those PLEX for Isk, and then using that Isk to buy the character - just like anything else in the game. Which nicely leads onto your second problem. When you buy PLEX, then sell it for Isk, you get a crapload of Isk - but the player you sold it to gets a PLEX. So what advantage have you gotten over the player you just sold the PLEX to, considering there's nothing preventing him simply selling on that same PLEX, possibly for more than you did? If you then use that Isk to buy a character, you get a character with skillpoints you, personally, did not earn - but the player you just bought it from, who did earn those points, gets a crapload of Isk. So what advantage do you get over that character, exactly, considering there's nothing preventing him from using that Isk to buy another character, or possibly even a better one? So, you see, the investment of money does not, currently, give you any advantage over the investment of time, even with the capability of buying PLEX for real-life cash.

Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Caldari
River-Rats in space
The Ditanian Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.03 20:05:00 - [1009]
 

Originally by: Ef Ahak
Edited by: Ef Ahak on 03/07/2011 19:34:36
Originally by: Kelnarn Shaelingrath
Originally by: CCP Navigator

Minimum Specs...
...
I'm running an I7 quad core W/HT, 24 gigs of ram, dual GTX 460 cards (recommended by CCP in the EVGA coupon code email) and about 4 TB of total hard disk space with an SSD as the Win7 OS drive, yet when I run 3 clients on my system with the station environment loaded this system slows to a literal crawl and it's by no means even close to a "low end" system.
...


Even though your HDD space means zero, it is obvious that you should be able to run this game absolutely flawless on that monster.

I just want to add a fact so that it doesn't get 'forgotten' in the performance discussion: there was a patch a few days before the release of incarna/CQ, where CCP turned part of the 2D UI elements into 3D dito. A change in shader coding, simply put.

Reason I say this is, as I said, so that it is clear that CQ is not the lone gunman in the case of the performance drop. It started with the re-coding of the normal UI a few days before CQ release.


yeah, I agree on both points...

The HDD space mention is simply to preempt any questions of running out of or being close to running out of hard drive space causing the system to not perform well overall and while that's rarely the case when I've worked on customer's systems that are performing poorly, I have seen it on occasion.

o/
K.S.


Psyclown Lucyphre
Posted - 2011.07.03 20:13:00 - [1010]
 

I had 3 EVE accounts. Lost all confidence in this world and the long-awaited WoD MMOG. btw who're living in total denial. I mean when they read the "Fearless" leak, they said if it was real WoD is dead!, Well it was real and now they adapt, LOL. One guy is turning to the Wodka bottle!

That BS video showing CCP & CSM convices me of the repetiton of this little event. Appeasement (1939)

Ok so that is like serious stuff and this is only a game after all, but hang on

to me my hard-earned $$$ is fukking serious. Next month i reduce my EVE experience to 1 account only, as it stands right now.

Lucy


Etil DeLaFuente
Posted - 2011.07.03 20:42:00 - [1011]
 

- Vanity items : "used for the sale of vanity items only" yeah riiight.. It's not like they said they'll never do MT.
- Performance improvement : Not even a vague idea of when, who or what will be done to resolve it or at least reduce performance issues.
- Old hangar : "CCP committed to introduce in some form at a future date" Haha good one.

So, all in all, CCP will do some more useless dev blogs once again, explaining how cool the crap stuff they force us to use is, without taking a firm engagement on resolving current issues and their future plans.
Great waste of time.

Integra Arkanheld
Posted - 2011.07.03 20:45:00 - [1012]
 

Originally by: Stephanie Rose
Originally by: GeneralMartok
Originally by: Heavenly Blues
Originally by: GeneralMartok
its a true shame that CCP caters to the tantrums of whiney ***gots


Hey look, this guy could have gotten a blowjob with what he spend on his e-monocle.


I bought 2 quafe shirts, a monocle, sterling dress shirt, commando pants and precision boots without spending RL money, I did this for your juicy tears and to show support for CCP over the tantrums of the chromosomally challenged

Maybe if the denziens of eve protested in this manner over botting, we'd actually have some progress in that arena



Your so right, you didn't spend any real money, just the person who bought the GTCs to make the PLEXes that you bought to buy your AUR, they spent real money.


People buying PLEX do so to have more isk. They do not need to do it, but it is their choice. It is still better than people using bots. It also helps to reduce the number of people selling isks for real money making it more limited.
People that have lots of isks,if they want to buy vanity items as it cost them nothing, it is their choice. they have no obligation to do it, but they have the choice if they want.
IF CCP has more people buying PLEX, and those people do it willingly without any obligation, without creating a problem for others, it is good for everyone. If CCP has more money, they can buy better hardware, so we can play with less lag. If they have more money, they can hire more people, and we can have more expansions for the game. People should not protest for vanity items (while it stays as vanity items and nothing else)

Utremi Fasolasi
Gallente
La Dolce Vita
Posted - 2011.07.03 20:50:00 - [1013]
 

Is that really The Mittani? I never him expected to be so.... hotness. Wow. O_O

Another myth crushed...

BIZZAROSTORMY
Posted - 2011.07.03 21:33:00 - [1014]
 

Originally by: Utremi Fasolasi
Is that really The Mittani? I never him expected to be so.... hotness. Wow. O_O

Another myth crushed...


You dont think they sent the real Mittani do you? thats one of the many Mittani voice Impersonators. Mittens never leaves his iron lung.

Liva Daril
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.03 21:53:00 - [1015]
 

Well, its been nice to feel good about EVE again, even if it was only for a day.

After reading up on the details and finally understanding, that the old efficient hangar is dead for good, Im off till you get your damn priorities right.

I will not stand for CCPs stubbornness pushing the pre-alpha Incarna client on us and again believing promises of a magic new Hangar that works just like the old one without hard-coded proof.

So long etc.. Rolling Eyes

qqsqq
Posted - 2011.07.03 22:11:00 - [1016]
 

You need only to add not so expensive stuffs for isks.. This is all what need from u CCP

John Zorg
Caldari
The Damned Legion
Posted - 2011.07.03 22:31:00 - [1017]
 

Originally by: Sorgenbinder
Originally by: The Offerer
Edited by: The Offerer on 03/07/2011 00:27:01
Originally by: Stephanie Rose
Originally by: The Offerer


Yes, you are in position to buy whatever you want by selling PLEX-es, but:
- you are giving game time to a player that need it to play;
- you are getting ISK that was created by that player through gameplay. By needing his ISK you've created content for that player - a need to get a bit more ISK to buy a PLEX.
- you will use that ISK to trade it for some items that other players produced. You've created content for them by having a need for those items and you've boosted the economy in the process (because as wee all know - more selling, healthier economy).

This system is nothing like "golden ammo". This system is good for the game.
----



If your rich an have lots of money, your BUYING an advantage, if your not rich, an don't have money, your not buy anything, but pounding sand. Whether you want to spin it as P2W, or not, it still gives an advantage to people who can afford it. Like someone said on a blog, no one seems to be able to clearly define P2W. Now, this may not be CCP selling you the stuff, it is coming from other players, but it still takes REAL money to make all this work, one way or another.




But what advantage? Smile
Do you have an advantage because you have the items
OR
does the manufacturer have the advantage because he gets your ISK
OR
does a PLEX buyer have an advantage because he can afford (ISK wise) to play the game for free?

It's a win-win-win scenario.Very Happy It's so cool that it's bigger than bi-winning... it's tri-winning.Cool




Yes, there could be several "winners". And everyone else is a "loser".

If I want to fly, say, a Charon but don't have the ISK to buy the skills, PLEX allow me to buy the skillbooks using real-world cash. If I buy those skillbooks from an NPC source, I am the only winner.

Once I've trained the skills, profligate fool that I am, I have no cash to buy the actual ship. Hey presto, another charge to my credit card and yay! - one sparkly new (well, slightly used) Charon sitting outside my balcony. Winners? Me, the guy who sold me the ship, and possibly the guy that built it. Losers? Anyone and everyone who might be in competition with me.

Ispo facto I have bought an in-game advantage.


I am glad that some people see this the way I do. The example given is very small scale. I for one don't care about losing ingame. But look at a scenario that we had recently as the NC. White Noise used either botting or GTCs to collect enough ISK together to buy double the super caps we had. They also had the ISK to pay contracts for other alliances to hit us... there is no way that they collected that from moons or ops... not possible. Dyspro and Prom has very low value.

Now, if they didn't bot then that ISK had to come from somewhere... GTCs? If that is the case then it's basically P2W.

I have been a long time supporter of this game, always played by the rules but the fact that people can inject infinite amounts of RL money into the game totally destroys the balance. I will not deny that GTC(PleX) is a great feature for those that cannot affort to play the game... but the abuse of it is too high a risk to the balance of EVE-Online. CCP will never stop the system I know, as it would be financialy a bad descision... CCP is not about the game any longer... it's about the money they can generate from this game.

Sad fact but true :(

JZ

Consortium Agent
Posted - 2011.07.03 23:08:00 - [1018]
 

Edited by: Consortium Agent on 03/07/2011 23:11:52
At long last I can put away my fire pit and all the blocks of cold hard steel I'd been ripping off my battleships to build pitchforks with.

Thank you, CCP, for stating the one thing that we asked of thee to begin with.

@CCP Zulu - I'm sure you'd rather see me burn and go to hell than accept my apology given how hard I was on you (and others at CCP, but mostly you), but nevertheless I apologize for my passionate and sometimes rage filled postings in the forums, some of which had personal attacks of your character. There is no excuse for my behavior.

@CCP Hilmar - You are still an ass and I owe you no apology :P

@Mittens - Although I'm still going to shoot the goons whenever I can whenever I do decide to give Eve another try <g>, you did a good thing here for *everybody* in Eve. Take note of how that makes you feel... is it as good as helping yourself or better? ;P

@CSM - It only took 6 CSMs to finally get CCP to understand your role in their game. Your days of public relations muppets are now over. Kudos. Kudos indeed.

/me looks at pile of battleship parts laying about his hamgar...

Say... anyone have some spare nano repair paste I can have?

Dan Estrellas Amigo
Posted - 2011.07.03 23:11:00 - [1019]
 

I would still like some more discussion on why CCP used evasive language, like "unfair" and game-breaking" instead of simply saying "game-affecting".

And why they only repeated "in the NeX store" when referring to non-vanity MTs, instead of saying no no-vanity MTs, period.

CCP did not deny non-vanity MTs outside the NeX store, at all.


CCP's statement means they have not denied, for example, special NPC agents that trade AUR for skill points at a fair price. That's just a hypothetical of course, but in short they did not deny any game-affecting MT that could be ended with the words "for a fair price."

And they did not deny any game-affecting MTs outside the NeX store, regardless.

dicen3
Posted - 2011.07.03 23:28:00 - [1020]
 

Originally by: d4shing
Originally by: The Mittani
what a huge pain in the ass this all was. just got back home.

as i said before, this whole mess could have been prevented with better communication from ccp, which is the company's achilles heel. i'm glad that we were able to help clarify things and that the spectre of gold ammo and gold ships and lowes in space can be put to rest, beyond the easily-trolled conspiracy theorist fringe who'll sperg out no matter who says what

now i'm going to go to sleep for a week. at least in wisconsin the sun goes down X(




I think they communicated pretty clearly that they want more of our money but that they don't want to have to earn it by making the game more enjoyable to play.

They even communicated that they're happy to consider making the game worse in the long-run if it wrings out more cash in the short term.

I don't think the problem was that they didn't communicate this in a sufficiently gentle manner.

support


Pages: first : previous : ... 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 : last (38)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only